Skip to main content

Goodwin vs. Darwin

Isn't it time the British media stopped using Ruth Padel as a whipping post? The latest installment was Sunday's column in the Sunday Times, by Daisy Goodwin, which basically argues that children (including her daughter) should not be encouraged to become professional poets, because it is a vocation that cannot really be taught, and that is best practiced by people in banks or offices like Eliot or Stevens, not creative writing profs, as work provides the humanity that drives inspiration; amateur poetry is the thing.

Her main example of the poet gone wrong is Padel, who is described more than once as "ambitious" for quitting her academic teaching post at the age of 44 to concentrate on writing poetry. The article is really ludicrous, and ill-informed, and, more to the point, badly damaging, I think, to poetry. I am beginning to recognise that the main enemy of British poetry is the British media - their ideas of what poetry is, or should be, are rather quaintly Victorian, patronising, or worse - and curiously moralising and demanding - the media really "wants" poets to be a certain way - rather than perhaps admitting that, if anything at all, poetry is about freedom (okay, play with a net if you want, but not one sewn by a journalist surely).

Now, I agree that poetry is a vocation. But that doesn't mean poets have to "keep the day job" or avoid any human temptations, like ambition, or a drive to succeed. I find the tone of this article deeply negative to women. I mean, would Goodwin have cautioned Seamus Heaney against "leaving his day job" (he quit teaching to focus on poetry), or suggest that Don Paterson stop teaching poetry writing at St Andrews, roll up his sleeves, and become a surgeon or truck driver? No, the examples of the proper poets are all men - mostly dead white wealthy males - who were privileged or lucky enough to have money to set themselves up, and write as they pleased.

Goodwin fails to mention the great gains made for British women's poetry over the last 30 years, by women refusing to buy into the stereotypes about what poetry is. She also, rather puzzlingly, fails to mention how active Padel has been, working in all the various ways that poets do, around the poem. Goodwin, I think, makes the common mistake of defining a "poet" as someone who composes poems. That's like saying a surgeon is only doing their job when knee-deep in blood and gore. Poets are also working when reading poems, writing about poems, teaching poetry, organising events for other poets, editing other poets, putting together anthologies, and, speaking on the subject of poetry - or reading their poems aloud to audiences. None of this activity is futile, or outside the umbra of what can be considered the role of the poet.

Now, in the UK, a deeply conservative strain of thought wants poets not to have any roles other than the inspired, unambitious "natural" dispenser of poetic utterance - but in the 21st century this is facile. Indeed, there are many ways that poets can develop active, rewarding careers - in line with their vocation - as activists, editors, critics, researchers, teachers, and so on - and by keeping busy they whet their poetic talent for the next poem. Eliot, in fact, was pretty much a professional poet figure most of his life, as editor-critic - his other work entirely underwritten and rendered meaningful by his total commitment to the significance of the poet in relation to his culture and community.

Goodwin's simplistic ideas about poets would set any intelligent women or man, girl or boy, back decades. Poets now get out there and do things - make things happen - and this unsettling active poetics - a poetics of writing and communion with nature and others - is disturbing precisely because it is complex, hard to simplify, and not merely "romantic". Padel has done as much for British poetry since she "quit her day job" than any one I know. Her books on poetry inspire many, are touchstones, and brilliantly useful for teaching. Her own poetic research and travels made her poems better - her Darwin book is a masterpiece, and may win the TS Eliot Prize this year, if Paterson or Lumsden don't snatch it away.

Goodwin is wrong to think that Padel was uniquely pernicious in her choices - if anything, she's been one of the angels. The poetry world is highly competitive, filled with intelligent, educated, hard-working, serious, often decent and sensitive people. The ambitions that animate a superb poet are much more troublingly rich and strange than a newspaper article, or blog post, can explain or query. Milton's ambition was huge, as was Dante's. It seems a very ugly twist of fate that this poetic heroine for our times has become a gargoyle. The media in the UK is on a rampage, and is damaging good people. It should stop and smell the roses.

Popular posts from this blog


Like a crazed killer clown, whether we are thrilled, horrified, shocked, or angered (or all of these) by Donald Trump, we cannot claim to be rid of him just yet. He bestrides the world stage like a silverback gorilla (according to one British thug), or a bad analogy, but he is there, a figure, no longer of fun, but grave concern.

There has long been a history of misogynistic behaviour in American gangster culture - one thinks of the grapefruit in the face in The Public Enemy, or Sinatra throwing a woman out of his hotel room and later commenting he didn't realise there was a pool below to break her fall, or the polluted womb in Pacino'sScarface... and of course, some gangsta rap is also sexist.  American culture has a difficult way with handling the combined aspects of male power, and male privilege, that, especially in heteronormative capitalist enclaves, where money/pussy both become grabbable, reified objects and objectives (The Wolf of Wall Street for instance), an ugly fus…


According to the latest CBS, ABC, etc, polls, Clinton is still likely to beat Trump - by percentile odds of 66% to 33% and change. But the current popular vote is much closer, probably tied with the error of margin, around 44% each. Trump has to win more key battleground states to win, and may not - but he is ahead in Florida...

We will all know, in a week, whether we live in a world gone madder, or just relatively mad.

While it seems likely calmer heads will prevail, the recent Brexit win shows that polls can mislead, especially when one of the options is considered a bit embarrassing, rude or even racist - and Trump qualifies for these, at least.

If 42-45% of Americans admit they would vote for Trump, what does that say about the ones not so vocal? For surely, they must be there, as well. Some of the undecided will slide, and more likely they will slide to the wilder and more exciting fringe candidate. As may the libertarians.

Eyewear predicts that Trump will just about manage to win th…


Announcing the Shortlist for the 2016 Sexton PrizeSeptember 13, 2016 / By Kelly Davio
Eyewear Publishing is pleased to announce the shortlist for the 2016 Sexton Prize. The finalists are, in no particular order, as follows:

HISTORY OF GONE, Lynn Schmeidler
SEVERE CLEAR, Maya Catherine Popa
SIT IN THE DARK WITH ME, Jesse Lee Kercheval

The shortlist was selected by Eyewear’s Director Todd Swift with Senior Editor Kelly Davio. Don Share of Poetry Magazine will select the winning manuscript, which will be released at the 2017 AWP conference in Washington, D.C. The winner will be announced in October. 
Congratulations to our finalists!